Menu

Grant Park Village Phase II Approved by Design Commission (images)

The Design Commission has approved Grant Park Village Phase II, a new 5 story building by LRS Architects and Lango Hansen landscape architects for developer Capstone Partners. The project will include 167 residential units and 100 vehicular parking spaces.

The building would be the second phase in the development of Grant Park Village, located on the former site of the Albina Fuel Co in the Sullivan’s Gulch neighborhood. The first phase was approved by the Design Commission in 2013 and completed in late 2014. The project site is adjacent to the future Sullivan’s Gulch Trail, and the project will include an access easement that connects NE 32nd Ave to the trail alignment.

The U-shaped building is oriented with a courtyard facing south. The main entry to the building will be located at the corner of NE 32nd Ave and a private street in alignment with NE Weidler St. Ground level units with entries directly to the street would face NE 32nd Ave.

The primary materials proposed for the project are metal panel and fiber cement panel. Dark colored brick will be used at the ground level. Vinyl windows will be used at the residential units and aluminum storefront at the ground level active use areas.

The project previously went before the Design Commission on February 4th 2016, at which time the Commission identified a number of issues with the project as then proposed. The largest issues related to the excessive ground floor program dedicated to parking and circulation and the exposed parking deck at the east elevation. Since the previous hearing the below grade parking has been redesigned to extend under the private drive, which allows all the vehicular parking to be located underground. An area of at grade parking has been replaced with a community room and games room, located adjacent to the courtyard. New ground level apartment units were also introduced on the east side of the building, where the Commission had previously expressed concerns about an exposed ramp to the underground parking. Other changes made included replacing the exposed concrete at the ground level with brick, and using more of the light colored metal panel and less of the dark panel at the east elevation.

Having responded to the concerns raised at the first hearing the Staff Report and Recommendation to the Design Commission [PDF] recommended approval for Grant Park Village Phase II. During the April 14th hearing Commissioner Livingston offered her thoughts on the changes that have occurred since February:

I think it’s obvious that a lot of work has gone into revising the ground floor of the building. The changes are much more reflective of the Design Guidelines—much more in compliance with the Design Guidelines—and it makes for a much stronger building overall. I like some of the changes that have happened at the southeast corner. Looking at the massing of the building it’s much more rigorously shaped than it was before, and I think that’s working very well also. The parking and the transformer, I think are a fine solution. Even though the parking access still appears to be a little bit tight, it’s just so significantly better and it does a much better job of complying with Design Guidelines. So generally, overall, I think the changes that have been made are just really positive.

The Design Commission voted 5-1 to approve the project, with Commissioner Savinar casting the lone vote against the project. Building permits will need to be obtained before work can begin on Grant Park Village Phase II.

What can’t Architects, Designers and Developers come up with more original concepts. These cookie-cutter apartments building do not add any awareness of history or character to the Portland landscape that draw people to our fair City.

Grant Park village lacks any architectural interest. Completely utilitarian to the core. As a long time grant park neighborhood resident I would have welcomed some modern flair. But this project just says cheap, cheap, cheap! And now phase II. The neighborhood assoc. thought it was a good decision to try to match this new development to gordons Fireplace building. This was a grossly misguided decision. Gordons Fireplace is an ugly old warehouse. Why would you want to continue that theme?